Declaration by Axel, Florian and Oliver at the trial

The ones who sit here at the dock are the wrong ones and they should be now condemned as members of a criminal association, under the paragraph 129. Warmongers, supporters of war and armament companies are the ones who belong to the dock. They are the ones to be prosecuted.

Is war peace?

One always repeats that nowadays wars - and especially in regards to the war in Afghanistan - would be actually missions of peace. In the case that one would retire the troops, there would a civil war or conditions of chaos. However, this is merely a speculation. Instead, what is sure is that the actual situation of war means misery, hunger and terror for the population of Afghanistan.

German politicians, from Jung until Merkel, indefatigably keep alive the myth that the ISAF, the NATO-troops which operate in Afghanistan, would act merely under the terms of a mission aimed to stabilize and restore peace. There it becomes more and more clear how they take part in a borderless war against the afghan population. In fact, when talking about the ISAF-deployment, where by now around 3.300 soldier are involved with, one can not describe this as an operation of development aid.

The so-called war against Terror at the Hindukusch adopts the means of anti-uprising combat, which in Afghanistan are directed against the ones who are combating, as much as against civilians. By taking over the command of the Rapid Deployment Forces, Germany entraps deeper inside this war of fighting against uprise.

By the end of August it became clearer once more, what this means for the population of Afghanistan. On the 21st of August, the coalition's troops undertook a massacre. They motivated their crimes by saying that they would have attacked a meeting of talibans in Herat, a western province of Afghanistan, with the help of the afghan army and that they would have killed 30 talibans, some of them leading heads of the Islamic resistance. A few days later, the independent commission for human rights of Afghanistan declared that 90 uninvolved persons, mostly women and children, have been killed as well. Even the government of Karsai, which is strictly connected with Western countries, had to admit that civilians died during the action.

The massacre produced massive protests in Afghanistan. In Azizabad, enraged inhabitants attacked afghan soldiers. Following such deeds of violence, the legitimate resistance against occupation increases within all the afghan social stratum. Generally, the media represent the afghan population as talibans or warlords - a completely distorted enemy's image. For many instead, it is only about a right to resist against the terror of occupying forces, against a war, where so many innocents die.

Again and again it comes to so-called incidents, which rather belong to war's everyday life: a day before the massacre in Herat, the dpa (note of the translator: German news agency) declared that the German army (Bundeswehr) would have shot at assaulter in the near of Faisabad. The police-in-chief of the province clarified that the latter was a shepherd. By using his hands, he signalized to the army's patrol to not drive too close to his herd. When a German soldier dies in Afghanistan, then he will be mourned with State's honors. At the end of august, a German paratrooper had been killed during an attack against a German convoy. His troops felled into a booby-trap, declared the Minister of Defense Jung. He condemned such deed as coward and perfidious. Instead, dead afghans will be commented as inevitable collateral damages produced by the war.

Does one need that many coffins come back full of German soldiers, in order to get it clear?: German troops have to get out of Afghanistan! Why, are the many dead afghans not enough? It seems not: a positive vote of the parliament in regards to an extension of the German army's mandate in Afghanistan seems as absolutely sure. Despite all the propaganda, even many German soldiers recognize what is really happening in Afghanistan. At this moment, there is decrease in regards to the voluntary service in combat; 10% of the aspirant officials quit their service already during their apprenticeship. They have a justified fear for their lives.

Which are the reasons of war?

The lies about German war's politic become more and more clear: already in 1999 one declared, we should make war again in order to prevent a new Auschwitz. By using such a mean instrumentation of the Shoah, one legitimated a war of aggression against Yugoslavia, a war against international laws and constitution. It costed the life of many civilians. Allegedly, one wanted to prevent a genocide in Kosovo. Selected destructions of electricity and water supplies, bridges, oil refineries and chemical plants rendered drastic people's life condition. Yugoslavia got destroyed.

Above all, what speaks for a war in Afghanistan is its geostrategical mean. In fact, the American company Unolocal wants to build a pipeline there. Afghanistan is interesting as pipeline corridor and lies close to the provisions of 2/3 of oil and gas. This land carries an important role inside the most important region for global politics, functioning as place for deployment of radar devices and platforms for shooting missiles. Lothar Rühr, former government spokesperson and State Secretary in the Minister for the Defense of the Republic, describes the safeguard of western investments in the new Afghanistan as the real reason of the war.

Therefore, one dictated several economical reforms during the occupation. Germany participated massively in conceiving a so-called agreement for the protection of investments. This allows foreigners to own companies in Afghanistan 100%, protects them against expropriation and liberate them from tax payment within the first 8 years. Already within the guidelines of defense strategy, one would mention the "keeping alive of the worldwide commerce and an unimpeded access to the markets and resources in all the world" as reasons of wars. A further reason for the German government to extend its military support in the war is the fact that it wants to demonstrate its complete loyalty as a partner to the NATO.

It wants to secure its position inside it and by this also consolidate the NATO itself. Indeed, a retirement of the German troops from Afghanistan would condemn the "war against terror" to a failure. Moreover, it would question the NATO in its present conception, say as an alliance acting worldwide also in the case of future wars of aggression.

Who makes profit with war?

And actually: to make business with death is a worth thing. In 2007, the worldwide military-spending arouse towards a record level. Altogether, the profits done by companies involved in arm-trade arouse massively and showed how it is lucrative when one commerces with military equipment.

The army devours milliards. The institute for peace based in Stockholm investigates on the biggest exporters of weapons. Germany is the third biggest exporter of armaments of the world, which a percentage of 10% on the worldwide market.

The company Heckler & Koch, as example, distributes worldwide their assault rifles G 36 in the crisis-centers of the world. For example to the georgian army, which on the 8th of August assaulted the capital of the Ossetia region armed with german weapons. With the georgian military offensive, the dirty war in Caucasus began. Above all, it met again defenseless civilians - also children: victim of a conflict, which swells since many years. Despite the prohibition to export, the standard weapon used by the German army, the assault rifle G 36 K, has been exported already in 2005 to Georgia. The directives of armament export forbid exporting weapon towards region of crisis. Either Heckler & Koch smuggled them illegally or the USA reselled theirs and infringed the Endverbleibsklausel, which is supposed to prevent such actions.

There was and there is again and again a delivery of weapons by German companies to States which violate human rights or lead war. Who is actually investigating against such criminal machinations? Who condemn them?

Where does the money for wars come from?

The intensity of war increases and one earn immensely through arm trade. Through the budget for the defense one set the financial basis for the German army to lead their wars.

On the 30th of November 2007, three deputies of the parliament decided the budget for 2008 and the defense budget has been increased again of a milliard, reaching quote 29,45 milliards. Also in relation to this, a larger portion of the population gets more and more poor. Too much money fly into the defense budget.

The cuts to the welfare state encounters primarily the ones who are anyway relegated to the margin of society. These developments are not to be divided from the worldwide situation of war. While the investments towards armaments are growing, one spares money in regards to the social sphere. Entire parts of the population get poorer, a new form of child poverty is born. The new social situation will be shamelessly exploited by strategists of the German army towards the winning of new blood. Some professors of the Bundeswehr-University in Munich reckoned that nowadays there would be an higher readiness to violence among young people. The readiness to kill seems to be an ideal resource.

From their perspective, they do not see a possible improvement of the work and apprenticeship market as desirable. In fact, they clearly see the chance to recruit new soldiers when looking at young people without perspectives. Therefore, the Bundeswehr tries to win new blood especially inside schools and job centers.

Where do the refugees of war remain?

The war against Afghanistan is also a reason for many to escape from their land. However, instead of welcoming them, since one produced the origins for their escape in the first place, the survivors of war have to suffer a migration politic strictly linked to interests of security and war. The goal of the present German and European migration politic is to intern refugees inside detention centers close to war areas - possibly outside Europe. It is about a rapid deportation of the refugees who managed to get to Europe, back to the war areas.

Already in June 2005, the German Inner Ministers decided basically the so-called ?repatriation? of all afghan refugees to the war. At first, one deported only the ones who committed crimes and single men, now, at least in Hamburg, one will send entire families towards a possible death. One year before, the Inner Ministers motivated such a decision by saying that, after the fall of the taliban's regime, the situation got stabilized.

There, there would be a secure situation by now. Inside one secret paper, produced exactly in THAT TIME, even the Foreign Office admitted that in the land there "would not be a secure State of origin".

Which resistance is possible against war?

A resistance, which carries the aim to attack the violence of the war, its economy and the army, in order to put an end to an occupation, the killing of civilians and the destruction of their life conditions, is legitimate. Sabotage is a part of such Right to resistance and should help to prevent worse things, say war interventions.

During the last years, there have been three action of sabotage in the Anglo-Saxon context, which the local juries did not punished, instead acquitting the defendants.

In 2003, peace-activists and others produced a damage of 2,5 millions of dollars at the Shannon's airport, Ireland, in order to sabotage the American military base with its war activities. The Irish State wanted to punish them. The jury decided that the military apparatus located at the airport would threaten the life and property of the Iraqi population. Therefore the produced sabotage would be legal and not criminal.

In May 2007 in Bristol, England, the jury acquitted unanimously two anti militarists. In March 2003 - shortly before the beginning of the war against Iraq - the two of them tried to sabotage some B52-Bomber of the US-Air force. They motivated their action by declaring how they wanted to prevent the bombing in Iraq by the mean of cluster bombs, which, exactly like mines, damage mostly the civil population. The jury motivated their acquittance by declaring how the both acted in order to diminish the damage for the population of Iraq and prevent war crimes.

Also in July of this year, a jury acquitted nine anti militarists in Belfast, northern Ireland. They conducted a direct action in 2006 against the offices of the Raytheon Company. By doing that, they demonstrated against the use of a military communication system produced by Raytheon, due to be used during the intervention of the Israelite army in Lebanon. They referred to Human Rights Watch, which denounced this very war as war crime. The jury unanimously decided that the destruction happened in the offices of the company based in Derry were directed towards the prevention of war crimes.

But here in Germany one tries everything to have a peaceful hinterland, in order to lead wars. Therefore, the aim of all government-bodies is to militarize society by any means necessary, also violence, and to make an enemy visible and identifiable, in order to exclude him/her and putting him/her into prison.

One makes the enemy visible by using law, the paragraphs 129, 129a and 129b and its application. One directs the paragraph 129 also against us. The dominants are the ones who decide who is the enemy. Therefore, one has to understand the MG-trial in this sense.

What is the point in our trial?

Following the reason of state, we should be processed and condemned as people active in the anti militarist resistance, revolutionaries and members of the Militant Group. In fact, when talking about this trial it is not only about an attempted arson against military vehicles, but rather about a so-called crime of association. Now, no matter if terrorist or criminal one, one can punish the mere membership, no matter if the single member committed a crime or not: the present paragraph 129 got structured in 1951 within the 1st law for changing the criminal code, in order to allow the persecution of communists in Germany.

It carries the function of a political criminal code in the moment that the Federal Court of Justice classifies the Militant Group as a criminal association, even though the article 103, paragraph II of the constitution reads that nobody should be discriminated or privileged because of his/her political ideas. Despite this, such criminal code aimed to punish mainly ways of thinking remains.

In name of the Militant Group there have been 24 attacks and attempted attacks to date, also, the try to provoke a debate about militancy and organization. They explained within their texts, how in this very phase their attacks could carry a mere propagandist and supportive impact for class or anti racist struggles. The Federal Court of Justice stepped back from their original declaration, which was that these actions could wipe out or interfere with the basic structures of the State ? an objective condition in order to define a deed as terrorist.

The prosecution acted by the BAW on the basis of the 129 paragraph should produce the effect of elevate such organized resistance to the level of State's enemy. Therefore, the trial against us could become an exemplary one, so that in the future one will be able to criminalize different means of the social conflict, from paint bombs to street riots, by applying the paragraph 129 and punish them by using a Feindstrafrecht (note of the translator: untranslatable concept, it describes a criminal code aimed to cancel all so-called Rights for some citizens when the latter are declared as State enemies; against them, the State will use any means necessary, they are no longer considered citizens-with-Rights)

The criminalization of political resistance does not hit us alone: right now, there is a trial in Stuttgart-Stammheim based of the paragraph 129b.

Also in other countries, political activists are being criminalize: in France the anarcho-autonomen, in Greece the anarchists, in Belgium and in Switzerland the Red Help International, in Austria the animal rights activists, in the Basque country and Italy the political-military Communist Party (PC p-m) and the Genoa resistance.

How does the State get preventively prepared against resistance?

The criminal code will be converted here into a code for the prevention of all risks. In order to lead wars undisturbed and secure capitalist normality, one undertakes measures which could be directed against everyone. A faster dismantling of democratic rights is always linked to this process. A growing militarization and extension of surveillance State will be pushed. The aim of the preventive State of security is to cancel the article 1 of the constitution, the defense of human dignity, article which is unchangeable, according to the constitution.

One foments the fear of terrorist threat, in order to be allowed to manipulate citizens toward this direction. There are no concrete indications for such a threat. But it serves for the reorganization of the State of Right. A large part of people endorses everything which could reduce such a potential threat. Most of the laws which guarantee individual freedom will be sacrificed to Security and many ones do not even get it. The security's politic sets at nought any concerns under constitutional law.

Yet the Inner Minister wants to abolish the prohibition of torture: in the case one defendant will be made loquacious in a brutal way, the German security agencies should be able to profit from this. The Inner Minister spins a yarn on extra-legal executions and wants to allow the firing of hijacked airplanes. Moreover, there are other things written on Inner Minister's list of desires or are already reality: the imprisonment of so-called conspirators or potentially dangerous people inside detention centers, the prohibition of communication for political disliked individuals or entire groups of migrants, house-searches without the presence of witnesses and persons concerned, secret on line-searches, employment of the army with weapons against demonstrators and blanket surveillance of citizens through police and secret service as well as dragnet investigations.

The proposals of the Federal Minister of Justice Brigitte Zypris (SPD) shows with which aggression the conditions might aggravate, since she wants to widen the anti-terror law with two new paragraphs, the 89a "preparation of an act of violence" and 91 "guidance towards an act of violence". By this, one should be able to prosecute individuals as much as terrorist associations.

It is not a new fact that in Germany one would suspend the legal order while enforcing State repression. Already in 1970, through the so-called crisis management groups one merged Legislative, Executive and Juridical powers within one complex, in order to act against the RAF. At the time of the Schleyer-kidnapping, the crisis management groups debated about the possibility to apply the death penalty against the imprisoned RAF-activists. The Federal General Attorney Kurt Rebmann proposed even to change immediately the article 102 of the constitution - "the death penalty is abolished" - and to shoot the ones, who "are supposed to be liberated by the terrorists through the extorsive kidnapping".

What does history teach us?

From the history of German fascism we learned at least that the National Socialist-State promoted a borderless violence of war with the support of its population, nationwide mobilized, a violence which the European civil population had to feel brutally on itself. After the second world war, after the millions of war deaths and the systematical killing of the European Jewish communities, there was only a lesson to be learned: never again war, never again fascism.

The resistance in the time after the war arouse from this: the resistance against rearmament, against rebuilding the Wehrmacht, which then had been called Bundeswehr, against nuclear tests, NATO maneuvers, imperialist war politic by the USA. If a court tries to condemn us, then such criminalization directs against the emancipative try to turn against a State and a dominant politic, which in the name of the so-called ?war against terror? lead war, drop bombs, kill and torture

Never again war!
Different forms of resistance are legitimate!
For a worldwide communist society!